News

Menlo Park: New driveway coming to Louise Street

Developer and residents reach compromise

It turns out that life on Menlo Park's Louise Street as the residents know it may survive the addition of one more driveway after all.

Developer Sam Sinnott and resident Kiki Kapany issued a joint press release on Friday (May 9) announcing that the two parties had settled their differences over a tangle of greenery on the cul-de-sac in a conflict that started more than a year ago.

The settlement will let Mr. Sinnott construct a 16-foot-wide paved driveway at 1825 Santa Cruz Ave. that will exit on Louise Street, while preserving a portion of the 53-feet-by-60-feet patch of greenery as open space.

Mr. Sinnott and investment partner Mircea Voskerician bought the property two years ago for redevelopment, but then ran into trouble when Louise Street residents protested the pair's plans to build a driveway and then switch the home's address from Santa Cruz Avenue to Louise Street. The residents argued that paving even a part of the green space would damage the character of their neighborhood.

Although city staff initially authorized the driveway, in August, the council voted to turn the green space over to the residents -- a process known as abandonment. Mr. Sinnott then filed a lawsuit in San Mateo County Superior Court in November against several of the residents as well as city officials.

When asked what made a settlement possible now, Ms. Kapany responded by referring to the press release. "That's all we have to say! Thanks so much!"

Bill Garrett, the attorney representing Mr. Sinnott, said, "Cooperation. Communication. Compromise." A framework for a settlement was reached back in February, he said, and the parties have since worked out the details.

The press release offered no details about the terms of the settlement. The revised terms of abandonment are part of the City Council's consent calendar for May 13.

Posted by Resident who cares
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on May 12, 2014 at 4:02 pm

To Jim Lewis-

Not sure, but that was satire, right? The only thing that led to this mutually agreed upon solution (note, not agreeable solution) was bullying and intimidation. The developers are now eagerly looking forward to getting what they wanted from the beginning, having silenced their most vocal opposition by suing them and requiring everyone to keep mum! A victory for the neighborhood is just getting the lawsuit dropped.

Please, everyone, let's not sugarcoat or doublespeak this. See it for what it is: it's ugly, there's lots of money at stake, and in my opinion, for Menlo Park this has been one of the most distasteful and disgraceful chapters in recent years. A few people are going to make a very nice profit on this, and the rest will begin to heal their wounds and rebuild their lives after two miserable years.

Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on May 12, 2014 at 4:40 pmPeter Carpenter is a registered user.

Resident who cares - do you care about the law, because the law is what prevailed? The City realized that long ago and that is why they bowed out and left it up to the law to decide what are the underlying property rights.

Posted by MP Resident
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on May 12, 2014 at 5:30 pm

The City abandoned the property subject to the placement of open space deed restrictions by the underlying property owners, while providing pedestrian easements for the historical usage of the land. It was not the City's intention to allow a driveway for vehicular access-they actually voted specifically against that in a prior meeting.

This press release is merely stating the position of the people most directly affected, namely the parties to the lawsuit. The Santa Cruz Avenue corridor will be also affected by this property being flipped around to Louise Street. Other nearby residents and neighbors will lose the open space at the end of the street without input into this settlement. The increased traffic to adjacent streets, namely Stanford Avenue and Lemon Street will be impacted by the redirecting of additional cars required to service a multi-million dollar home.

If the City Council members are going to reverse their position I hope that they do so intelligently, and require the research necessary to understand how their decision will impact the surrounding community, the flow of traffic, effect on nearby schools and pedestrian crossings, etc. I can't imagine that the City Council would permit the permanent destruction of the open space (putting in a 20' driveway easement and two 5' pedestrian easements in a 60' wide space) and changes to multiple neighborhoods without taking the time to properly analyze the consequences. Prior decisions on this matter were based on maintaining the historical character of the neighborhood. If they actually decide to re-open this issue then they need to consider the substantive impact to all of the residents and visitors to Menlo Park BEFORE they grant the effected property owners this financial windfall.

Posted by MP resident
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on May 13, 2014 at 9:17 pm

The reporter's snide opening paragraph inappropriately diminishes the Louise Street residents' legitimate concerns about the impact of the driveway and loss of green space. Mr. Carpenter's comment inaccurately suggests that there was some kind of legal ruling in this case about underlying property rights. That is not the case. There was simply a settlement.

Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on May 14, 2014 at 10:52 amPeter Carpenter is a registered user.

The reason there was a settlement was that those opposed to this access realized that they would lose if it went to court - why else settle?

As for the bullying charge remember that this is what Long Time Louise St Resident posted on July 23, 2013:

"The issue is 12 against 1, and I have a hard time understanding why you support the 1 vs. the 12 in this case."

So who is the bully?

My response then and now is:
"I just don't support the mob rule concept that the 12 have more legal rights than the 1. We have laws to ensure that everyone is treated the same. Would 11 of you have the right to eject the 12th from your little island? I don't think so."

Posted by Baffled
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on May 15, 2014 at 3:29 pm

I suppose Peter Carpenter must sympathize with Tom Perkins, who believes that the 1% of richest Americans are being bullied by the rest of us. He falsely equates settlement with some ruling on the law. The law in this instance remains in dispute. Parties to lawsuits settle for all sorts of reasons. The suggestion that "we have laws to ensure that everyone is treated the same" naively (or perhaps purposely) implies that everyone has the same resources to devote to prosecuting (or defending) lawsuits.

Clearly Mr. Voskercian does not hesitate to spend money on lawsuits, as witnessed not only by the events on Louise Street, but also by his willingness to sue Mark Zuckerberg for alleged fraud on another development deal (in which Zuckerberg paid Voskercian $1.7 million simply to withdraw an offer he had made to the owner of a property abutting Zuckerberg's).

Posted by legal bulldog
a resident of Menlo Park: Felton Gables
on May 15, 2014 at 4:37 pm

Ever been involved in a lawsuit, Peter? People don't settle because they "realize they would lose." If situations were so cut/dried that outcomes were preordained, there would be no need for the court system at all!

The Louise Street neighbors have had to live with this talented team of bullies breathing down their collective necks and threatening them for over two years. Being involved in such a legal action is a costly, ulcer-generating experience that can force the participants to put their lives on hold while they deal with unrelenting attacks.

At some point, individuals may decide it simply isn't worth ruining their lives in pursuit of justice. When you pit ordinary decent people against money-hungry opponents without scruples, this kind of outcome is not surprising. But it does not reflect legal realities.

Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on May 15, 2014 at 4:44 pmPeter Carpenter is a registered user.

Given that this is the only driveway on Louise Street that has been designed with the input of and specific consent of the neighbors I suspect that it will also be the most attractive driveway and will, in time, be viewed as an asset.

Don't miss out on the discussion!Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online.
Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information
and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.